Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36963027›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2023

'Why would they spend all this money and give us these items for free?': Exploring precarity and power in a cleaner cookstove intervention in rural Malawi.

Jane Ardrey, Kate Jehan, Nicola Desmond, Caroline Kumbuyo, Deborah Nyirenda, Stephen B Gordon, Kevin Mortimer, Rachel Tolhurst

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jane ArdreyDepartment of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4558-5113
Kate JehanDepartment of Public Health, Policy and Systems, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Nicola DesmondDepartment of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2874-8569
Caroline KumbuyoBaylor College of Medicine, Lilongwe, Malawi.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5707-0489
Deborah NyirendaMalawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi.
Stephen B GordonMalawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi.
Kevin MortimerDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8118-8871
Rachel TolhurstDepartment of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L009242/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We carried out a qualitative study to gain a deeper understanding of the social context of the Cooking and Pneumonia Study (CAPS) and implications for implementation of clean cooking and similar interventions. Such initiatives are recognised as complex, power-laden processes, which has consequences for outcomes and uptake. However, understanding of how precarious livelihoods and unequal power differentials impact on trials of technology is limited and potentially hampers the achievement of the SDGs including SDG 7, Affordable and Clean Energy. An in-depth exploration of experiences and perceptions of cooking and cookstove use within CAPS was completed using qualitative methods and the participatory methodology Photovoice. Ten CAPS participants from each of five villages participated in Photovoice activities and five village representatives were interviewed. Twelve fieldworkers participated in gender specific focus groups and four were interviewed. A thematic content approach was used for data analysis. The analysis showed that economic and power inequity underpinned the complex social relationships within CAPS impacting on trial participation, perceptions of the cookstoves, and on the potential of the intervention to affect health and other benefits. Power can be understood as relational and productive within the research environment. This is illustrated by an analysis of the role of fieldworkers and community representatives who needed to negotiate resistance to trial compliance decisions, including 'satanic' rumours about cookstoves and blood-taking. Transformative approaches that challenge existing power inequities are needed to maximise the success and beneficence of cookstove and other health promoting interventions, and achievement of the SDGs.

Identifiers

PMID36963027
PMCPMC10022019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read4
reference markers read19
identifiers read3
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.